Comments on: Tenet and the “Creamy White House Stationery”

By: freepatriot

freepatriot — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 00:03:17 +0000

maybe I’ve gone goofy, but didn’t Saddam’s own son in law tell us Saddam had no WMDs ???

defected, sold out the lie of WMDs, returned to Iraq to be killed by Saddam ???

did I dream that ???

or am I creating my own reality or something

anybody who said Saddam had WMDs in 2001 was lying

nuff said

case closed

By: ohmercy

ohmercy — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 00:01:40 +0000

I know I’m a day too late but I’m trying to play catch up.

but our foreign intelligence colleagues and we assessed that these individuals were parroting the Ba’ath party line and trying to delay any coalition attack.

What struck me in this paragraph as well as the fresh hell that you pointed out “parroting the Ba’ath party line and trying to delay any coalition attack.”

Well duh.
Of course they were… it was always a catch 22. They didn’t have WMD and they couldn’t provide proof of what they did not have but if they did not provide proof they would be attacked by coalition forces.
So Tenet says the Ba’ath party line was telling them there was no WMD’s and despite having this repeated by multiple sources they- Bu$hco conveniently ascribe this as a way to delay being attacked. Hello?

So rather than do more research which might become public knowledge they have to go in and get him just because they can. And now we see they couldn’t if you know what I mean.

Anyway, wish I could articulate what I’m trying to untangle.
Its about the idea of delaying being attacked party line that is tickling at me.

Wish I was you Marcy.
Always awesome!

By: MsAnnaNOLA

MsAnnaNOLA — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:09:49 +0000

Thanks for all your work as usual. I can read all the posts right now but just wanted to say that. I hope someday someone will be held to account for these crimes.

By: JohnLopresti

JohnLopresti — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 15:37:59 +0000

Last June, Tom Engelhardt published this Thomas Powers ~15pp review, from the NY Review of Books, of the then recently published book “At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA” ‘by GTenet with Bill Harlow’. I read Suskind’s classic on Bush as if viewed through the lens of the establishment clause, from NYTmagazine2004, and thought it informative but somewhat ad hominem. With the stationery fiasco now, it seems there need to be some new facts around which to retrofit policy, but such is prewar hype, which pretty much is how Powers in 2007 depicted the ambience in 2003. The coterie that devised the flypaper war plan from many motivations had a president leading them who needed just such a component to bolster party, write history in wide strokes. It seems some of the IT stuff they implemented might have effected similar outcomes with respect to actually finding and bringing terrorists to justice without creating the regional problem Iraq was to become once destabilized. It is probably important to continue to examine how the dynamic of preemptive war prosecuted by the US occurred, and reset checks and balances to contravene against some future attempt at replication of that sort of executive discretion, though many of the top folks likely are glad for the ‘progress’ as well as the methodology employed. I wonder if Tenet is glad for how things developed, but right now Suskind appears to have removed some of the publicly told fictions at a minimum from Tenet’s story, though Woodward had a funny way of relating the basketball story, too.

By: MarieRoget

MarieRoget — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:58:20 +0000

EPUville, but I’m back, & here’s yr. reply- I’m w/Petro. This fall would be an excellent time to liven things up on Capitol Hill w/some Congressional investigations.

But will Dems dare to do so? It may be now or not @ all for these type of hearings, as the “bygones be bygones” bi-partisanship (so have grown to despise that term recently) WH mentality looms after 1/09.

By: Petrocelli

Petrocelli — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:47:07 +0000

I’m thinking that the fall would be a great time to have hearings on this and other malfeasance, so it can be front and center, right up to Election Day …

By: Neil

Neil — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:50:43 +0000

N-OT:

Since un-retiring this spring, Favre has made it known that he wants to return to the Packers and have a chance to be the starter or to be traded within the division: Each of those outcomes has one thing in common: He’d have a chance to get back at Packers management: in the first instance because he would win a power struggle with them, and in the second because he’d have a chance to stick it to them (by playing against the Packers twice a year and showing them and the world what they were missing.) [Favre to Bucs?] http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.....s-revenge/

By: wavpeac

wavpeac — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:30:47 +0000

So, I guess I have always assumed that we can only look to them for answers up to a certain point.

I was married to a guy who had a security clearance. He was a software engineer and regularly spent time in the pentagon and the whitehouse basement several floors below.

It just dawned on me that it is at least possible that they cannot answer that concern without confirming things that they probably are not cleared to confirm. And then, it may mean that what they are saying is absolutely true…but when folks have a clearance, it seems like you can never be too sure. I know there are certain lines that they will not cross or even imply.

By: skdadl

skdadl — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:10:21 +0000

I can’t tell from here — does it feel to you and people you know that there’s just no time to do other things as the conventions and the election loom? Are people feeling distracted and squeezed a bit?

By: MarieRoget

MarieRoget — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:00:39 +0000

Someone just informed me he needs a ride to work in Culver City. Why this couldn’t have been mentioned last night…
BBL